User talk:Richard Monkey
Welcome Hi, welcome to ! Thanks for your edit to the List of oldest siblings (3 siblings) page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Ozcaro (talk) 18:45, August 15, 2015 (UTC) Inserting false information, calling someone names Richard Monkey, The following accusation is being made against your account: He was doing this yesterday. He was offending me (User:Richard Monkey) in any way he could, saying I insult Andrew Hatch because I said he wasn't verified. Then he said I insulted Yasutaro Koide, and then called me 'mentally challenged' because I have Aspergers' syndrome. |} Please explain yourself. 1. Are you claiming an unverified case is verified? 2. Are you insulting persons with Aspergers' syndrome? Ryoung122 (talk) 21:22, September 10, 2015 (UTC) :Robert, I should point out that user Richard Monkey is not the vandal. I think there's been a misunderstanding due to the placement of the bracket in the quoted sentence. When the 110 Club member, in the quote you cited, says "(User:Richard Monkey)", he's referring to his own Gerontology Wikia account name. Cheers. Ozcaro (talk) 04:40, September 11, 2015 (UTC) :Richard Monkey may not be the vandal, but his contentious editing style may have played a factor in motivating their personal attacks. He needs to learn to not simply revert edits he disagrees with but to discuss contentious edits on the "talk page" first.Ryoung122 (talk) 15:54, October 2, 2015 (UTC) 108 and 109 year old men I separated them into two lists: List of men who lived to be 108 and List of men who lived to be 109 17:22, September 15, 2015 (UTC) :*Why? Richard Monkey (talk) 17:23, September 15, 2015 (UTC) ::*They are different ages. 17:24, September 15, 2015 (UTC) So? The 'List of all supercentenarians' has people from different ages?Richard Monkey (talk) 17:25, September 15, 2015 (UTC) :*That list is very long. I cannot see often it because it doesn't load for me all the time. 17:41, September 15, 2015 (UTC) ::*Hmmm... I'm not sure which article you are talking about. There is one I am having trouble loading because it's too big. 17:42, September 15, 2015 (UTC) :::*Maybe I was thinking of some other wiki. Nevermind. 17:43, September 15, 2015 (UTC) I was talking about this one: http://gerontology.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_all_supercentenarians Richard Monkey (talk) 17:44, September 15, 2015 (UTC) :*Okay. 17:51, September 15, 2015 (UTC) Please don't undo edits of admins without discussing the issue first. Let's start with the obvious: any list of supercentenarians is unlikely to include "all" people ever who attained age X. Instead, we have a subset of information (the hypothetical all available information) based on cases that we have knowledge of and records for. Second, we should confirm all the Gerontology Wiki lists to confirm to the international GRG standards. It's OK to have pending and unvalidated cases, but they should not be ranked and be listed with a different coloration. Also, the "assumption" that a case might not have been checked yet ends at 114.99 for females and 110.99 for males.Ryoung122 (talk) 18:17, September 28, 2015 (UTC) RichardMonkey, While you have made a lot of positive contributions to the GerontologyWiki, you have also gotten into quite a bit of disputes as well. Part of the problem seems to be your editing style...you simply revert the edits of others wholesale without considering what might be of value to keep first. You should not be making a second similar "undo-type" edit without first discussing on the talk page of the article and/or the talk page of the editor that you are having a disagreement with before continuing.Ryoung122 (talk) 18:22, September 28, 2015 (UTC) Good start. Ryoung122 (talk) 20:55, October 1, 2015 (UTC) Hello there. Please stop undoing my edits. Susannah Mushatt Jones is the name preferred by the family.Ryoung122 (talk) 15:13, October 2, 2015 (UTC) WHY have you continued to refuse to communicate? I realize that you are not a "vandal" and are not here to vandalize. However, quite a bit of your edits have been problematic, as has been your editing style. Let's start with: 1. "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater". You need to learn that if your "undo" undoes multiple edits, but only part of the previous edit needs repair, you need to NOT use "undo" but simply make a new edit. 2. Your grammar is not that great. You really shouldn't be the one trying to "fix" grammar issues when you have issues yourself. 3. Your understanding of article-writing is low. It's not sufficient to say that "person X is a supercentenarian". So what? what are they known for? 4. You continue to revert edits by other users (such as myself, Lia) without bothering to take the issue to the talk page, even though I've already asked you do several times. Did you notice that I am an "admin" and an expert in the field? Have some respect. If you wish to challenge me, do so the proper way...raise the issue on the talk page. Each time, your block is getting longer and longer. If you plan to have a long-term future here at the Gerontology Wiki, I suggest you show some maturity and begin to with collaboratively with others, not just try to force your own editing style (which is not that great) on everyone else.Ryoung122 (talk) 16:50, October 6, 2015 (UTC) Firstly, my grammar is brilliant. Show me where I've gone wrong in terms of grammar. Secondly, what if the issue doesn't need to be raised on the talk page when it's only a minor thing? Thirdly, I haven't been saying that 'Person X is a supercentenarian'. I've been saying that they are verified, pending or unverified. That is useful information to anyone new to the field of longevity. So, I don't see what I've been doing wrong. Richard Monkey (talk) 17:01, October 6, 2015 (UTC) Greetings, Richard Monkey has agreed, in an outside discussion, to be more respectful of other editors and more careful with his editing. I am going to shorten his block in response but if problems recurr, the block will be re-instated.Ryoung122 (talk) 18:44, October 6, 2015 (UTC) "Recur." Sorry about that.Ryoung122 (talk) 18:52, October 6, 2015 (UTC) List of oldest people from New Zealand As there are currently two pages on this wiki regarding the oldest people in New Zealand, I would suggest merging the two pages. Now, since the List of oldest people in New Zealand page includes a list of the "oldest living people in New Zealand", it makes sense to merge that particular list with the List of oldest people from New Zealand page, which includes a more detailed list of the oldest people ever from New Zealand. At least then, all of the information for New Zealand will be available in one place. I just wanted to check this with you, as you created this page. Let me know what you think about the idea. Cheers. --Jim1997 (talk) 14:35, October 18, 2015 (UTC) Please stop inserting uncorroborated information, as you did with "national longevity recordholders".Ryoung122 (talk) 15:59, October 26, 2015 (UTC) What? A 1 week block just for inserting Cruz Hernández as El Salvador's oldest person? That's a bit harsh, don't you think? Tell me what information I've inserted is false. Richard Monkey (talk) 16:28, October 26, 2015 (UTC) And there is a source for Frederick Beache: http://z3.invisionfree.com/The_110_Club/index.php?showtopic=8630 Richard Monkey (talk) 16:30, October 26, 2015 (UTC) You're doing a better job lately I don't have time to supervise every day, but I was impressed that, in the latest discussion with Pluto2, you used logical responses, rather than logical fallacies. You are improving. Now, that's not to say that I've checked everything you've done this week...Ryoung122 (talk) 04:34, November 5, 2015 (UTC) Don't Assume! Proof is proof, no proof is no proof. Don't just make up something like saying that Shingo Kitamura died when you don't actually know that.Ryoung122 (talk) 04:39, November 5, 2015 (UTC) Incorrect Photos Today you inserted several incorrect photos into articles. These changes were reverted. Please be more careful the next time you upload photos.Ryoung122 (talk) 02:51, December 6, 2015 (UTC) Well, how am I supposed to upload the correct image? They were correct before and then changed themselves. Richard Monkey (talk) 07:20, December 6, 2015 (UTC) Now you've gone and blocked me? What was that for? I DIDN'T KNOW the images would change. I request to have my block shortened. I feel like you're blaming me for something I didn't even know was happening. Richard Monkey (talk) 07:22, December 6, 2015 (UTC) Hi Richard Monkey, the issue with the image arose from the uploading of the James King image, which you titled "image.jpeg". The file "image.jpeg" was then inserted into various other pages, which meant that those pages also included the image of James King. I have since removed the image from the pages where it should not have been included, and have renamed the file to "James_King.jpeg". For future reference, when uploading an image, it's best the name the file after the supercentenarian, followed by the correct extension code, ie. jpg, png, etc. Cheers--Jim1997 (talk) 13:37, December 6, 2015 (UTC) ::Richard, I have unblocked you since I don't see any signs of those being intentional acts. However, I would suggest that you use the "Preview" button before each edit is published. It's always a good idea to do a quality control, to see that everything is the way it should be, rather than just rushing to the next article without looking back. Deal? Ozcaro (talk) 14:07, December 6, 2015 (UTC) Cases shown to be false/exaggerated It's bad enough to have "unvalidated" data in the "List of Supercentenarians who died in year X"...because some of them listed might not even be supercentenarians. But it's even worse to insert claims already shown to be false, such as Raleigh Williams. Instead, add him to a List of False/Exaggerated Cases. If there's not an article on that on this Gerontology Wiki, I suggest you start one.Ryoung122 (talk) 02:53, December 6, 2015 (UTC) I'll see about making that article. Thanks for the suggestion. Richard Monkey (talk) 07:20, December 6, 2015 (UTC) :Another idea is to color-code false/exaggerated deaths...perhaps a light purple/violet background would suffice.Ryoung122 (talk) 14:38, December 7, 2015 (UTC) Don't make up rankings I already said that the Gerontology Wiki is an "encyclopedia," not a kid's fansite. Please do not self-make up rankings, as you did at Ellen Boing, without at least adding some kind of qualifier..."oldest known" rather than "oldest," for example.Ryoung122 (talk) 16:53, December 23, 2015 (UTC) Middle Names I note that you added the middle name of Alida Harst-Mathijssen to the List of supercentenarians born in 1905, but why add her middle name and not the middle name of the various other supercentenarians listed on that page, most of whom do not have a middle name included, but most likely do have a middle name. Also, I note that with George Ives, you were adament that his middle name should not be included in the title of the article, so why should a middle name be included in the entry of a list for a supercentenarian, but not the title of the article for that supercentenarian? --Jim1997 (talk) 19:00, December 31, 2015 (UTC) :If you want to include the middle name of a supercentenarian in a list, then include it for all those listed on the page, or none. You can't simply pick and choose. :Cheers--Jim1997 (talk) 19:00, December 31, 2015 (UTC) NO Original Research This is not the place for original research. Don't add WOP categories to claims not yet recognized as such by GWR or the GRG.Ryoung122 (talk) 17:40, January 3, 2016 (UTC)